I have mapped this mathematically in a network of nodes and vectors, but perhaps the easiest way is to describe this with a game that children play, the telephone game:

Person A tells Person B a piece of information, then B tells C, then C tells D, and so on. There is always a probability of information deterioration when the information is passed from one person to another. So, statistically speaking, given a random sample of communicating people, the information is more likely to deteriorate as the number of nodes increase.

How does this relate to the Mormon church?

I have identified two major fundamental flaws in its hierarchal structure which contribute to its informational crisis:

1) In a church comprised of male and female members, the local and global core church leaderships always exclude females. At the ward level, the bishop, who is called to ultimately make or approve all decisions directing the ward and also judging the individual worthiness of members, is always male. When disciplinary proceedings are held at the stake level, those overseeing the court are always male. In the global leadership, those over the entire church membership are always male. In other various local arenas, like in temples, areas, missions, regions, the leadership is always male. And in marriages, as is covenanted in the endoment, the leader of the couple is always the husband.

So if there are any natural or circumstances differences generally between men and women, the information used to convey them to these leaderships will always be subjected to a longer telephone line, more nodes, with the higher probability of message alteration. Therefore that information tending to be unique to women will not be conveyed as easily as the information unique to men. This is easily demonstrated in perhaps the shortest, most common network, between husband and wife:

If the husband is always to be the final authority in the couple, the information known specifically to the wife must always be subject to an information exchange. She cannot directly assert authority using her first-hand observations. If she ever does act as the authority, it is only exceptional or, according to the covenant, due to the acquiescing of her husband. And although women do serve all over the church, this pattern is repeated throughout. The person with the last word is always male.

2) As mentioned in the first fundamental flaw, natural or circumstantial differences unique to females will not be as well-conveyed to the core leadership. This makes the institution experience a lack of information which can be critical to the entire church membership. Yet this difficulty is enhanced further than natural and cicumstantial differences, through artificial differences perpetuated by church structure. The roles of men and women are divided in the church. Generally, men are tasked to lead church and family as well as provide financial support, and women are tasked to raise the children. This creates even more sets of information unique to women, thus making the information line and its weaknesses more important.

So, what's the big deal? Besides the cultural attitudes where women are treated as less-than, or as commodities, or put on pedestals as angel mothers, or made the gatekeeper's of male sexuality and temptation, women and "womens' work" are universally excluded from critical junctures in the institution. Women do not discern worthiness of others, they do not preside over judgment scenarios, be it when men or women's wothiness are called into question or when men or women are accused of abuse. This means that core leadership never experiences the first-hand observations of females and the female experience in the church and its structures.

A tragic but all-too-common example occurs when we are forced to acknowledge the sexual abuse cases involving church members and also eventually church leadership. In every case, the people likely most often abused or closest to the abused, as in abused women and mothers of abused children, are universally excluded from disciplinary decision-making. That's how the church works.

The informational crisis is a chronic deficiency that we may have learned to tolerate when it does not affect us, or that we're taught to accept when it does.

Although I do talk about this problem in terms of information, it is very much a moral problem. Females and all issues over which females preside (which can be critical to the whole church) are not being well-represented in the decision making perspectives of church leadership. It is neglect and it is a moral failing.

I am excited to refresh my understanding of mathematical systems analysis when we move. The local university is home to a researcher specializing is sociological systems analysis and religions. My plan is to pursue a higher degree in the field.

I know this isn't a very common angle in critiques of the church, but system analysis intrigues me and once a model is legitimately mapped, it can have significant ramifications across the field, not just religions or other institutions , but wherever systemic models can be applied! :)

Nothing to add, but that was very insightful. If victims are excluded from the process, the judgment is left to those who have few points of reference in common with the victims. If anything, they naturally relate more to male perpetrators.

Nothing to add, but that was very insightful. If victims are excluded from the process, the judgment is left to those who have few points of reference in common with the victims. If anything, they naturally relate more to male perpetrators.

Thanks. I rushed the writing and narrowed the ending too much to make it sound about victimization only. But yea, it affects the reception of all information coming from women.